Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.

The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Search Forums
Custom Search
Who's Online
1 registered (Revlgking), 87 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
51 die in recent tornado's in Oklahoma
by Bill
0 seconds ago
Jill Stein: Why capitalism is killing the planet
by Revlgking
Today at 05:45 PM
Monsanto a must see , revealing revelation
by paul
Yesterday at 11:30 AM
Metallic orbs a Skymap?
by Mike Kremer
05/19/13 06:15 PM
monsanto sneaks in yet another one
by paul
05/19/13 05:55 PM
Times Squ: Web-Cam
by Mike Kremer
05/19/13 11:38 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
paul 44
Bill 31
samwik 28
Mike Kremer 17
Revlgking 11
Topic Options
#43564 - 05/10/12 09:00 PM Another unlikely idea
Bill Online   content
Megastar

Registered: 12/30/10
Posts: 1000
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
Science Daily Magazine has an article about there being a lot more free floating planets in our galaxy than there are stars. I don't know about that, it is certainly possible that a lot of planets are out there. Ethan Siegel in his "Starts With A Bang" blog has a post about how Jupiter size planets that form close to their parent stars will throw smaller planets out of that solar system. So there can be a huge number of free-floating planets out there.

Where I have a problem with the article is that the researchers who wrote the paper that is being reported on say that lots of those planets are life bearing. That rings alarm bells for me. First off, they say that these planets formed in the early universe, when it was only a few million years old. I'm not sure how life would have formed at that early age, since the concentration of heavier elements would have been much lower than it is now. The other problem is that I'm not sure how life would have formed at the low temperatures free floating planets would encounter.

Bill Gill

Top
Of Interest?
#43775 - 05/23/12 10:09 AM Re: Another unlikely idea [Re: ]
Bill Online   content
Megastar

Registered: 12/30/10
Posts: 1000
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
Originally Posted By: saffyro
If that so, we couldn’t enjoy the night sky, billion light years stars will be hinder by the floating planets since they outnumbered the stars. And detonation will be our everyday view ‘coz its impossible for those floating thing not to bump each other.


That really isn't a problem. It is a matter of scale. Assume Jupiter is an average planet size (143,000 km). There are bigger and smaller, but let's use that for thinking. The nearest star (other than our sun) is about 4.4 light years. That is 41,598,721,804,147.2 km. Rounding that off we get about 41E9 km between us and the nearest star. Jupiter's size would round to 143E3 km. So roughly 3E5 Jupiters could fit in that distance. And that is linear, actually the free floating planets would be all round. So there isn't any problem with our distant vision being obscured by free floating planets.

Bill Gill

Top
#43777 - 05/23/12 10:40 AM Re: Another unlikely idea [Re: Bill]
redewenur Offline
Megastar

Registered: 02/14/07
Posts: 1744
Loc: Thailand
Hi Saffyro. Re free-floating planets bumping into each other:

A few billion years from now, the Andromeda galaxy is expected to merge with the Milky Way. Each of them contains - at a minimum estimate - 100 billion stars. Yet simulations have shown that very few stars, possibly none, will collide; such is the immensity of the space between them. Our entire solar system, were it to be intact at that time, would be expected to remain intact, even though it might be ejected, as a whole, from the galaxy. That seems to suggest that perhaps collisions between free-floating planets might also be rare.


Bill
Originally Posted By: Bill
The nearest star (other than our sun) is about 4.4 light years. That is 41,598,721,804,147.2 km. Rounding that off we get about 41E9 km between us and the nearest star. Jupiter's size would round to 143E3 km. So roughly 3E5 Jupiters could fit in that distance.

Even better when you correct it Bill: 4.16E13 km, so about 3E8 (300,000,000) Jupiters. I'm not sure that it's easier to visualize, but if you scale down Jupiter to the size of tennis ball, then the nearest star would be as far away as the Moon
_________________________
"..I met a man who wasn’t there...He wasn’t there again today...I wish, I wish he’d go away.."

Top
#43778 - 05/23/12 11:29 AM Re: Another unlikely idea [Re: redewenur]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 1216
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
I would take all bets ... free money :-)
_________________________
SAGG bad boy ... NEWSFLASH Church services cancelled this week we lost GOD and his Book.

Top
#43779 - 05/23/12 11:49 AM Re: Another unlikely idea [Re: Orac]
Bill Online   content
Megastar

Registered: 12/30/10
Posts: 1000
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
Originally Posted By: Orac
Even better when you correct it Bill: 4.16E13 km, so about 3E8 (300,000,000) Jupiters. I'm not sure that it's easier to visualize, but if you scale down Jupiter to the size of tennis ball, then the nearest star would be as far away as the Moon

Well, I was afraid I had gotten it a little wrong, I just whipped through the calculation in my head real fast instead of actually working it out. I didn't think I got it that far off.

Bill Gill

Top



Moderator:  Amaranth Rose II, Kate, Mike Kremer 
Newest Members
, PatGrrr, , Mordan, Zurich
2964 Registered Users
Social
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2013 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.